NEW ZEALAND MEAT

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 198, 22 August 1935, Page 22

NEW ZEALAND MEAT

LONDON AGREEMENT.

MR. COATES , EXPLANATION.

SOME POINTS TO BE SETTLED.

(By Telegfaph.—'Press Association.)

WELLINGTON, Wednesday.

The agreement with the British Government in regard to the supplies of meat to the United Kingdom was dealt with at length by the Minister of Finance, Mr. Coates, at the civic reception to the Prime Minister and himself in Wellington to-night.

In referring firstly to the British Government's desire to protect the farmers of the United Kingdom, Mr. Coates said that New Zealand's _ best policy was to co-operate with Britain, so that any scheme evolved for protecting British producers would, as far as was humanly possible, also be in the best interests of New Zealand. Dominion producers had secured an agreement that no levy or tax would be placed by Britain on imports of New Zealand mutton and- lamb. In addition, the principle of regulating marketing was retained, so that from both points of view—prices and quantities —the mutton and lamb agreement was eminently satisfactory. Meat Agreement Incomplete, Iγ regard to the unfinished meat agreement Mr. Coates said that in publicly discussing the beef position as the delegates left it one who took part in the detailed discussions had the advantage of inside information, but for the moment that was also a disadvantage as finality was not reached. It might, however, be said that as far as New Zealand was concerned a satisfactory settlement had been reached. All outstanding matters of difference between themselves and othen, parties to the discussions—and differences were considerable enough at the early stages of the negotiations— had been cleared away.

The settlement reached was acceptable to the New Zealand Cabinet and to the: Meat Producers' Board, but other Governments —some within and some bej-ond Empire Governments—which had treaty rights, had yet to define their attitude. One point generally recognised was that if producers were to be saved from ruin there must be an intelligent regulation of supplies. There must be a collective effort. If farmers insisted on remaining in cut-throat competition they would suffer. Empire Meat Council. The next jdain fact that had to be faced was that the British Government was not prepared on its own undivided responsibility to regulate supplies to their markets. It had found that that was a task—however necessary it might bo in the interests of producers generally— to which considerable odium and diiiiculty were attached: It was plain that a tariff would not soive present problems, even if it gave substantial preference to New Zealand. They therefore were driven hack to the necessity for a system of regulating supplies, and hence the suggestion to create an Empire Meat Council, which would have an extensive responsibility in relation to market supplies. .. In addition to* the Empire Meat Council, it might he found expedient to have another inclusive authority which would embrace representatives of all supplying countries. To this conference the United Kingdom would call all who were substantially concerned with the British meat market. It would be an advisory and recommending body which would acquaint Governments of the facts an,d outlook for various types of meat. . iAn.'obviously indispensable part of any such plan would be the effective organisation of producers. Their representatives, would be directly Jinked with the Empire Meat Council and with any other body- of the kind. In.New Zealand they already had an organisation in the ..Meat Producers' Board. The final responsibility would necessarily rest with Governments, but, short of taking the. ultimate responsibility, the" Meat Council could undoubtedly build around itself a useful set of functions. Agricultural Levy. •>'There'had been "considerable talk of imposing a levy on the imports of agricultural produce in order that the British producer might be assisted. Nothing in that aspect had been decided, said Mr. Coates, but it had been made clear that if there were to be a levy—and this would inevitably fall, in part at least, on the producers in countries of supply—they could, not be altogether indifferent to tr.e^ purposes for which it would be used. If.it were earmarked solely for subsidising competitors of their own producers, regardless of efficiency, it would be more objectionable. If, 'in part at any rate, it could be used for taking surpluses off the market and for di«-' tribming them to the people who would otherwise be going short, it would to that extent be less objectionable. The task of increasing consumption, especially among the poorer sections of the community, would have to be watched, said Mr. Coates. Naturally it was to New Zealand's interest to co- '■ operate in any endeavours to increase consumption, and the Government would giv? sympatlmtic support io any practicable methods of accoinplisiiing this.